Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 1 of 53
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`DODOTS LICENSING SOLUTIONS LLC,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`vs.
`
`APPLE INC., BEST BUY STORES, L.P.,
`BESTBUY.COM, LLC, and BEST BUY
`TEXAS.COM, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 6:22-cv-00533-ADA
`
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`This is an action for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,369,545; 8,020,083; and
`
`8,510,407 (the “patents-in-suit”), in which Plaintiff DoDots Licensing Solutions LLC
`
`(“DoDots”), makes the following allegations against Defendant Apple Inc. (“Apple”)
`
`and Best Buy Stores, L.P., Bestbuy.com, LLC and Best Buy Texas.com, LLC (collectively,
`
`“Best Buy,” or “BBY) (collectively with Apple, “Defendants”):
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`DoDots is a Texas limited liability company with a place of business at
`
`32932 Pacific Coast Highway, #14-164 Dana Point, CA 92629.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Apple is a California corporation with
`
`regular and established places of business throughout this District, including at least at
`
`W. Parmer Ln. & Dallas Dr., Austin, TX 78729 and 3121 Palm Way, Austin, TX 78758,
`
`which are located within the subpoena power of this Court. Apple is registered to do
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 2 of 53
`
`business in Texas and may be served via its registered agent at CT Corp System, located
`
`at 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, TX 75201.
`
`3.
`
`Apple sells and offers to sell products and services throughout Texas,
`
`including in this judicial district, and introduces products and services that perform
`
`infringing methods or processes into the stream of commerce knowing that they would
`
`be sold in Texas and this judicial District.
`
`4.
`
`Apple’s products are offered for sale through numerous mobile carriers in
`
`this judicial District, including, but not limited to Verizon stores at 2812 W Loop 340
`
`Suite# H-12, Waco, TX 76711; 1820 S Valley Mills Dr, Waco, TX 7671; and 3590
`
`Greenlawn Blvd Suite 103, Round Rock, TX 78664; T-Mobile Stores at 2448 W Loop 340
`
`Suite 24a, Waco, TX 76711 and 208 Hewitt Dr Suite #200, Waco, TX 76712; and AT&T
`
`Stores at 4330 W Waco Dr, Waco, TX 76710; 2320 W Loop 340 #100A, Waco, TX 76711;
`
`and 1515 Hewitt Dr Ste A, Waco, TX 76712 (collectively, “Waco and Austin Carrier
`
`Stores”). On information and belief, Apple products relevant to the allegations in this
`
`Complaint have been sold and used at the Waco and Austin Carrier Stores, and are
`
`offered for sale at the Waco and Austin Carrier Stores.
`
`5.
`
`Apple has authorized sellers and sales representatives that offer and sell
`
`accused Apple products relevant to this Complaint throughout the State of Texas,
`
`including in this District, and to consumers throughout this District, such as: Best Buy,
`
`4627 S Jack Kultgen Expy, Waco, TX 76706 and 11066 Pecan Park Blvd Ste 300, Cedar
`
`Park, TX 78613.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 3 of 53
`
`6.
`
`Apple also owns and operates Apple Stores in multiple locations in this
`
`District including stores at 3121 Palm Way, Austin, TX 78758; 2901 S. Capital of Texas
`
`Hwy, Austin, TX 78746; 15900 La Cantera Parkway, San Antonio, TX 78256; 7400 San
`
`Pedro Avenue, San Antonio, TX 78216; and 8401 Gateway Boulevard West, El Paso, TX
`
`79925 where accused Apple products relevant to the allegations in this Complaint have
`
`been sold and used, and offered for sale.
`
`7.
`
`Apple also operates a growing $1 billion campus in this District at W.
`
`Parmer Ln. & Dallas Dr., Austin, TX 78729. On information and belief, and according to
`
`publicly available reports, the Apple Austin campus will initially employ over 5000
`
`people with the ability to employ up to 15,000 people.
`
`https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/11/apple-expands-in-austin/
`
`8.
`
`Defendant Best Buy Stores, L.P. is a corporation organized and existing
`
`under the laws of Virginia with its principal place of business at 7601 Penn Ave South,
`
`Richfield, MN 55423.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant BestBuy.com, LLC is a corporation organized and existing
`
`under the laws of Virginia with its principal place of business at 7601 Penn Ave South,
`
`Richfield, MN 55423.
`
`10. Defendant Best Buy Texas.com, LLC is a corporation organized and
`
`existing under the laws of Virginia with its principal place of business at 7601 Penn Ave
`
`South, Richfield, MN 55423.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 4 of 53
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`11.
`
`This is an action for infringement of U.S. patent nos. 9,369,545; 8,020,083;
`
`and 8,510,407 arising under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code.
`
`12.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
`
`and 1338(a).
`
`13.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Apple in this action pursuant to
`
`due process, by virtue of at least the substantial business Apple conducts in this forum,
`
`directly and/or through intermediaries, including but not limited to: (1) having
`
`committed acts within the Western District of Texas giving rise to this action and
`
`having established minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of
`
`jurisdiction over Apple would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial
`
`justice; (2) having directed its activities to customers in the State of Texas and this
`
`District, solicited business in the State of Texas and this District, transacted business
`
`within the State of Texas and this District and attempted to derive financial benefit from
`
`residents of the State of Texas and this District, including benefits directly related to the
`
`instant patent infringement causes of action set forth herein; (3) having placed its
`
`products and services into the stream of commerce throughout the United States and
`
`having been actively engaged in transacting business in Texas and in this District; and
`
`(4) either individually, as members of a common business enterprise, and/or in
`
`conjunction with third parties, having committed acts of infringement within Texas and
`
`in this District.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 5 of 53
`
`14. Apple has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in this
`
`District directly and through third parties by, among other things, making, using,
`
`performing, selling (including through websites), offering to sell, distributing, and/or
`
`importing products and/or services that infringe the patents-in-suit as defined below.
`
`15. Apple has, directly or through its distribution network, purposefully and
`
`voluntarily placed infringing products in the stream of commerce knowing and
`
`expecting consumers within Texas and in this District to purchase and use them.
`
`16. Apple has committed direct infringement in Texas.
`
`17. Apple has transacted, and as of the time of filing of the Complaint,
`
`continues to transact business within this District.
`
`18. Apple derives substantial revenues from its infringing acts in this District,
`
`including from its manufacture, use and sale of infringing products in the United States.
`
`19.
`
`Venue is proper in the Western District of Texas pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1400(b).
`
`20.
`
`BBY has committed acts of infringement in this judicial district.
`
`21.
`
`BBY has a regular established place of business in this judicial district at
`
`4627 S. Jack Kultgen Expy, Waco, TX 76706.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 6 of 53
`
`
`
`22. On information and belief, the Court has personal jurisdiction over BBY
`
`because BBY has committed, and continues to commit, acts of infringement in the state
`
`of Texas, has conducted business in the State of Texas, and/or has engaged in
`
`continuous and systematic activities in the State of Texas.
`
`23. On information and belief, BBY’s instrumentalities that are alleged herein
`
`to infringe were and continue to be used, imported, offered for sale, and/or sold in the
`
`Western District of Texas.
`
`24.
`
`BBY has agreed, on multiple occasions, that Best Buy Stores, L.P.,
`
`BestBuy.com, LLC, and Best Buy Texas.com LLC, all subsidiaries of Defendant Best Buy
`
`Co., Inc., were proper defendants in this District and have agreed to not challenge
`
`venue for those defendants. See, e.g., MV3 Partners, LLC v. Best Buy Co., Case No. 18-cv-
`
`374 (WD.Tex), ECF No. 29 and NXP USA Inc., v. Mediatek Inc. et al., Case No. 21-cv-318,
`
`(WD. Tex), ECF No. 40 (“Substitute Best Buy Defendants are the proper parties to
`
`defend against allegations made in this patent infringement lawsuit.”).
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 7 of 53
`
`Background
`
`25.
`
`This case arises from groundbreaking technology that the named
`
`inventors of the patents-in-suit developed at the turn of the 21st century. At that time,
`
`accessing content on the internet generally involved the use of web browsers such as
`
`Microsoft’s Internet Explorer or Netscape Navigator running on a personal computer or
`
`primitive mobile device. Viewing internet content on many devices was hindered by
`
`the fact that existing web content and web applications were designed to fit an entire
`
`web page displayed on a traditional computer monitor. Many web pages were also
`
`slow and difficult to navigate. Various attempts to enhance the traditional web pages,
`
`such as the addition of “plug-ins”, were equally unsuccessful because they only added
`
`to the “mess” of the web page. See
`
`https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2000/0515/6511334a.html.
`
`26.
`
`John Kembel and George Kembel, twin brothers, recognized that there
`
`was dissatisfaction with the traditional web browser and that there was a “growing
`
`desire for individual users to fully control the aggregation and presentation of content
`
`and web applications that appears on a client computer.” See, e.g., U.S. patent no.
`
`9,369,545, col. 1, ll. 48-51.
`
`27.
`
`The Kembel brothers are Stanford engineering, business, and design
`
`school alumnae. Together, they founded DoDots, Inc. and were also successful in later
`
`start-ups that were acquired by leading companies like Oracle Corporation.
`
`28.
`
`In view of the needs in the marketplace, the Kembels sought to develop a
`
`unique and novel technical solution to a computer-specific process of retrieving and
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 8 of 53
`
`viewing content. The Kembels wanted to eliminate the need for a web browser all
`
`together. See
`
`https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2000/0515/6511334a.html?sh=6e61f9b3e197.
`
`29.
`
`So, in 1999, the Kembels, along with fellow Stanford graduate student,
`
`Tony Medrano, founded DoDots, Inc. in Silicon Valley. They developed a novel
`
`approach to delivering content from the internet in the form of connected widgets or
`
`applications, called “Dots” rather than via a web browser. Those “Dots,” also referred
`
`to as “Network Information Monitors,” were “fully configurable frame[s] with one or
`
`more controls; the frame through which content is optionally presented.” See, e.g., U.S.
`
`patent no. 9,369,545, col. 4, ll 56-60.
`
`30.
`
`The Dots used one-tenth of the data that a traditional web page would
`
`use, thus allowing for faster loading and display of internet content. See Exh. 1 (Business
`
`2.0: “Windows on the World,” August 22, 2000).
`
`31. DoDots, Inc. raised over $20M in funding from leading Silicon Valley
`
`venture capital companies such as Softbank, Chase HQ and Merrill Lynch due to
`
`strength of their “Dot” technology.
`
`32.
`
` To commercialize this technology, DoDots, Inc. created a system and
`
`platform for its businesses and other third-parties to develop such widgets or apps and
`
`make them available to desktop and mobile devices. The technology was
`
`groundbreaking and revolutionary.
`
`33. As noted in an article by CNN in April 2000, the DoDots, Inc. technology
`
`was the “Web without a browser,” and “DoDots is an application made up of small
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 9 of 53
`
`windows called dots. Through these windows, you can take advantage of the features
`
`and services offered by certain Web sites without actually visiting them through a
`
`browser. Because the dots are small and operate outside the browser, they provide a
`
`faster, more direct link to content providers, according to representatives of DoDots, the
`
`new Internet company that makes the application . . . .‘ says John Kembel, the
`
`company’s chief technology officer.” https://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/
`
`computing/04/07/dodots.idg/index.html.
`
`34. At its height, DoDots, Inc. employed more than 100 people that were
`
`designing, innovating, and selling the DoDots, Inc. technology. See
`
`https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Back+to+the+launch+pad%3a+after+a+few+dorman
`
`t+years%2c+tech+entrepreneurs...-a0169825785.
`
`35.
`
`The success of DoDots, Inc. saw it valued at $275 million. The company
`
`listed dozens of customers that had used the technology to distribute their own Dots,
`
`including ABC, Bloomberg, Edmunds, CNET and Merriam-Webster. Seeking to
`
`capitalize on this marketplace adoption, the company evangelized the concept of Dots
`
`and demonstrated the technology to all who would listen, including at conferences
`
`attended by many leading technology companies of today. See Exh. 1 (Business 2.0:
`
`“Windows on the World,” August 22, 2000).
`
`36.
`
`Indeed, companies like ABC saw the value of the Dot technology and
`
`were extremely excited to partner with DoDots, Inc. As Alan Cohen, executive vice
`
`president of marketing and advertising of ABC stated “In our continuing effort to find
`
`new ways to connect with our audience, the ABC Dot truly stands out as a
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 10 of 53
`
`revolutionary new communication device . . . . the ABC Dot will give our viewers a
`
`chance to use their computer desktops in ways they never imagined.” The ABC Dot was
`
`used with such popular shows like “Who Wants to be a Millionaire” and “NYPD Blue”,
`
`among others. See Exh. 2, DoDots, Inc. Press Release, October 2, 2000.
`
`37. DoDots, Inc. launched and scaled a developer program, cultivating a
`
`community of over 400 independent Dot developers who were deploying Dots and a
`
`base of over 250,000 end-users.
`
`38. DoDots, Inc. also sought and entered into partnerships with leading
`
`wireless solutions providers such as 2Roam, to expand its reach to the wireless market.
`
`The CEO of 2Roam, Bryan Wargo, stated “DoDots technology is a killer application for
`
`wireless devices as it supports the information needs of the on-the-go mobile
`
`professional and, like 2Roam, enables users to maintain a constant state with their
`
`wireless content or application.” And Bob D’Acquisto, 2Roam’s director of business
`
`development, recognized that “[the DoDots, Inc. technology] gives 2Roam a new and
`
`unique way to package and distribute content to [its] customers . . . it’s a win-win for
`
`everyone.” See Exh. 3, DoDots, Inc. Press Release, September 7, 2000.
`
`39. DoDots, Inc. won back-to-back awards from DemoGod at the DEMO2000
`
`and DEMOMobile 2001 conferences, the leading industry event for disruptive
`
`technologies at the time.
`
`40. DoDots, Inc. was named as an “Investor’s Choice” winner at the
`
`Technologic Partners’ Internet Outlook Conference held in Silicon Valley in September
`
`2000. See Exh. 4, DoDots, Inc. Press Release, September 20, 2000.
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 11 of 53
`
`41. Unfortunately, when the industry-wide dot com bubble burst, investors
`
`withdrew support at a critical stage of its growth, leaving DoDots, Inc. with limited
`
`options. Notwithstanding the closure of DoDots, Inc., the technology it pioneered has
`
`been co-opted by numerous companies selling mobile devices, computers, and web
`
`applications, including Defendants.
`
`THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`42. On June 14, 2016, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) duly
`
`and lawfully issued U.S. Patent No. 9,369,545 (the “’545 Patent”), entitled “Accessing
`
`and Displaying Network Content,” naming John Albert Kembel, George Andrew
`
`Kembel, Daniel S. Kim, John Russell, Jake Wobbrock, Geoffrey S. Kembel, Jeremy L.
`
`Kembel, and Lynn D. Gabbay as inventors.
`
`43. DoDots is the lawful owner of all right, title and interest in the ’545 Patent
`
`and has the right to sue and recover for past infringement of the ’545 Patent. A copy of
`
`the ’545 Patent is attached as Exh. 5.
`
`44. On September 9, 2020, the USPTO’s Patent and Trial Appeal Board
`
`(“PTAB”) issued a final written decision finding that “Petitioner has not shown by a
`
`preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–10 and 12–15 of the ’545 patent are
`
`unpatentable.” Specifically, the PTAB rejected the assertion that any of the challenged
`
`claims were invalid as obvious under § 103. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s
`
`decision on December 8, 2021. See Lenovo Holding Co. v. DoDots Licensing Sols. LLC, Nos.
`
`2021-1247, 2021-1521, 2021-1580, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 36126, at *2 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8,
`
`2021).
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 12 of 53
`
`45. On September 13, 2011, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,020,083 (the “’083 Patent”), entitled “System and Methods for Creating and
`
`Authoring Internet Content Using Application Media Packages,” naming John Kembel
`
`et al. as the inventors.
`
`46. DoDots is the lawful owner of all right, title and interest in the ’083 Patent
`
`and has the right to sue and recover for past infringement of the ’083 Patent. A copy of
`
`the ’083 Patent is attached as Exh. 6.
`
`47. On January 19, 2021, the PTAB issued a final written decision finding that
`
`“claims 1–16 of the ʼ083 patent have not been shown to be unpatentable.” Specifically,
`
`the PTAB rejected the assertion that any of the challenged claims were invalid as
`
`obvious under § 103. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision on December 8,
`
`2021. See Lenovo Holding Co. v. DoDots Licensing Sols. LLC, Nos. 2021-1247, 2021-1521,
`
`2021-1580, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 36126, at *2 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8, 2021).
`
`48. On August 13, 2013, the USPTO duly and lawfully issued U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,510,407 (the “’407 Patent”, collectively with the ’545 and ’083 patent, the “patents-in-
`
`suit”), entitled “Displaying Time-Varying Internet Based Data Using Application
`
`Media,” naming John Kembel et al. as the inventors.
`
`49. DoDots is the lawful owner of all right, title and interest in the ’407 Patent
`
`and has the right to sue and recover for past infringement of the ’407 Patent. A copy of
`
`the ’407 Patent is attached as Exh. 7.
`
`50. On January 5, 2021, the PTAB issued a final written decision finding that
`
`“Petitioner has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that any of claims
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 13 of 53
`
`1, 8–13, and 20–24 are unpatentable.” Specifically, the PTAB rejected the assertion that
`
`any of the challenged claims were invalid as obvious under § 103. The Federal Circuit
`
`affirmed the PTAB’s decision on December 8, 2021. See Lenovo Holding Co. v. DoDots
`
`Licensing Sols. LLC, Nos. 2021-1247, 2021-1521, 2021-1580, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 36126,
`
`at *2 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8, 2021).
`
`Apple’s Pre-Suit Knowledge of the Patents-in-Suit
`
`51. On information and belief, Apple was aware of the ’545 Patent as late as
`
`October 18, 2013. Exh. 8; Exh. 9.
`
`52. On information and belief, Apple was aware of the ’083 Patent as late as
`
`October 18, 2013. Exh. 8; Exh. 9.
`
`53. On information and belief, Apple was aware of the ’407 Patent as late as
`
`October 18, 2013. Exh. 8; Exh. 9.
`
`54.
`
`Persons with knowledge of Apple’s awareness of the Patents-in-Suit
`
`include Edward Scott, a former Senior Counsel, Patent Strategy and Licensing, Patent
`
`Acquisitions at Apple; Tom Mavrakakis, a former Director of Patent Strategy at Apple;
`
`and Elaine Wong, a member of Apple’s Patent Acquisitions team.
`
`Apple’s Infringing Devices and Activities
`
`55. Defendant Apple makes, has made, uses, has used, sells, has sold, offers
`
`for sale, and/or imports into the United States devices including mobile phones (e.g.,
`
`Apple iPhone, iPhone 6, iPhone 6S, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6S Plus, iPhone SE, iPhone 7,
`
`iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, iPhone X, iPhone XR, iPhone XS, iPhone XS
`
`Max, iPhone 11, iPhone 11 Pro, iPhone 11 Pro Max, iPhone 12, iPhone 12 Mini, iPhone
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 14 of 53
`
`12 Pro, iPhone 12 Pro Max, iPhone SE (Second Generation); Tablet computers (e.g., iPad
`
`Air, iPad mini, and iPad Pro Tablets); Smartwatches (e.g., Apple Watch (First through
`
`Seventh Generation); and iOS enabled mobile devices (e.g., iPod Touches) (collectively,
`
`the “Accused Apple Devices”).
`
`56. Additionally, beginning in 2007, Apple launched and continues to
`
`operate, use, sell, and import an operating system (e.g., iOS 1.0, iOS 2.0, iOS, iOS 3.0, iOS
`
`4.0, iOS 5.0, iOS 6.0, iOS 7.0, iOS 8.0, iOS 9.0, iOS 10.0, iOS 11.0, iOS 12.0, iOS 13.0, iOS
`
`14.0, and iOS 15.0,) along with other software (e.g., installers and the App Store app)
`
`that are pre-installed or updated on each Accused Apple Device (the “Accused Apple
`
`Software”). Apple programmed and developed the Accused Apple Software
`
`specifically for its Accused Apple Devices and is directly responsible for and has direct
`
`control over the use of the Accused Apple Software.
`
`57.
`
`Each and every iteration of the Accused Apple Software is specifically
`
`designed by Apple to cause the Accused Apple Devices to download applications from
`
`the Apple App Store (“Apple-Supported Apps”) in a specific manner. More
`
`particularly, Apple is directly responsible for, and has direct control over, because of the
`
`way it programmed and developed the Accused Apple Software, each and every
`
`Accused Apple Device that is configured to execute the Accused Apple Software code
`
`to obtain Apple-Supported Apps by transmitting a request to the Apple App Store and
`
`receiving the Apple-Supported App in response to that request.
`
`58. Moreover, each Apple-Supported App, which runs with the Accused
`
`Apple Software contains specific information that allows the user experience (including
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 15 of 53
`
`the graphical user interface) of the Apple-Supported App to be presented on the display
`
`of the Accused Apple Devices.
`
`59.
`
`By making, selling, offering for sale, and importing the Accused Apple
`
`Devices that require the Accused Apple Software, which executes specific code to
`
`obtain, install and use Apple-Supported Apps, Apple directly infringes the Patents-in-
`
`Suit. Further, by making, selling, offering for sale, importing, operating and using the
`
`Accused Apple Software installed and running on the Accused Apple Devices that
`
`require the Accused Apple Software, which executes specific code to obtain and utilize
`
`Apple-Supported Apps, Apple directly infringes the patents-in-suit.
`
`The Accused Apple Devices Infringe the ’545 Patent
`
`60. Apple directly infringes all of the claims of the ’545 patent.
`
`61.
`
`For example, Claim 1 of the ’545 patent reads as follows:
`
`(Claim 1 Preamble) A computer-implemented method of obtaining content
`over a network and displaying the content to a user, the method being
`implemented in a client computing device in operative communication
`with a server over a network, the client computing device including
`electronic storage, a display, and one or more processors configured to
`execute one or more computer program modules, the method comprising:
`
`(Claim 1 limitation (a)) transmitting a request to the server over the
`network, the request requesting networked information monitor template;
`
`(Claim 1 limitation (b)) receiving the requested networked information
`monitor template from the server over the internet, the requested
`networked information monitor template having been transmitted from the
`server over the network responsive to the transmitted request, the
`networked information monitor template comprising:
`
`a definition of a viewer graphical user interface within which content in a
`web browser-readable language may be presented on the display of the
`client computing device; and
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 16 of 53
`
`a definition of a first content element for the networked information
`monitor template, the definition of the first content element referencing a
`first network location from which the first content element for the
`networked information monitor template is served over the network;
`
`(Claim 1 limitation (c)) responsive to instructions included in the requested
`networked information monitor template, presenting the viewer graphical
`user interface defined by the networked information monitor on the display
`of the client computing device separate from and outside of any other
`graphical user interface that includes user controls for specifying the first
`network location from which the first content element for the networked
`information monitor is served over the network;
`
`(Claim 1 limitation (d)) responsive to instructions included in the requested
`networked information monitor template, transmitting over the network a
`first content request to the first network location referenced by the
`definition of the first content element for the networked information
`monitor template;
`
`(Claim 1 limitation (e)) receiving, over the network, the first content
`element transmitted responsive to the first content request;
`
`(Claim 1 limitation (f)) presenting the received the first content element in
`the viewer graphical user interface defined by the networked information
`monitor template, wherein the definition of the viewer graphical user
`interface and/or the first content element define all controls for enabling a
`user to interact with the first content element through the viewer graphical
`user interface.
`
`62. Apple infringes each step of the computer-implemented method recited in
`
`Claim 1 of the ‘545 patent because it implements, operates and uses its Accused Apple
`
`Software, which executes specific code to obtain, display and use Apple-Supported
`
`Apps, on its Accused Apple Devices, which are in operative communication with a
`
`server over a network and include electronic storage, a display, and one or more
`
`processors configured to execute one or more computer program modules.
`
`63.
`
`First, the preamble of Claim 1 is met because Apple executes, operates
`
`uses, and has direct control over a computer-implemented method of obtaining content
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 17 of 53
`
`over a network (such as the internet) and displaying the content to a user that is
`
`implemented on each and every Accused Apple Device, which are in operative
`
`communication with a server over a network and include electronic storage, a display,
`
`and one or more processors configured to execute one or more computer program
`
`modules:
`
`
`
`Source: Medium.com, History of Apple iPhones accessed at
`(https://medium.com/macoclock/history-of-apple-iphones-57c06323135b)
`
`
`64. On each of the Accused Apple Devices, the Accused Apple Software,
`
`because Apple directly and specifically programed it to do so, practices the claimed
`
`method by implementing code on a client computing device (i.e., each Accused Apple
`
`Device) in operative communication with a server (such as an Apple App Store server)
`
`over a network (such as the internet), the client computing device (i.e., each Accused
`
`Apple Device) including electronic storage (such as each Accused Apple Device’s
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 18 of 53
`
`nonvolatile storage), a display (such as each Accused Apple Device’s monitor/screen),
`
`and one or more processors (such as each Accused Apple Device’s processor(s))
`
`configured to execute one or more computer program modules.
`
`65.
`
`Specifically, the Accused Apple Devices that execute the Accused Apple
`
`Software have electronic storage, display, and processor that are used to communicate
`
`over a wireless network to access the internet, as seen in the exemplary product
`
`specifications shown below:
`
`Source: https://www.deccanchronicle.com/technology/mobiles-and-
`tabs/010919/apple-iphone-11-series-complete-specifications-leaked.html
`
`
`
`
`66. Apple infringes limitation (a) of Claim 1 because the Accused Apple
`
`Software in each and every Accused Apple Device transmits a request to a server over
`
`the network, the request requesting a networked information monitor template. In
`
`particular, Apple programs, executes and uses, and has direct control over the Accused
`
`18
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 19 of 53
`
`Apple Software in each and every Accused Apple Device in a specific and particular
`
`manner so that the Accused Apple Software sends a request to an App Store server for
`
`an application package (the application package herein is an .ipa file) over the network
`
`and that request requests a networked information monitor template (e.g., ipa file,
`
`which is a data structure including data structures that constitute the NIM template).
`
`67. Apple infringes limitation (b) of Claim 1 because Apple programmed and
`
`executes the Accused Apple Software in its Accused Apple Devices to receive the
`
`requested networked information monitor (“NIM”) template (such as, for example, a
`
`.ipa file corresponding to a Stock Market App/widget) from a server over the internet,
`
`the requested networked information monitor template having been transmitted from a
`
`server over the network responsive to the Accused Apple Software’s transmitted
`
`request.
`
`68. Moreover, the Accused Apple Software requires the data structures in .ipa
`
`files for any Apple-Supported App, which includes a NIM template, to include:
`
`a definition of a viewer graphical user interface within which content (e.g.,
`how and where the graphical user interface presents a stock price) in a
`web browser-readable language (such as XML or JSON) may be presented
`on the display (monitor) of the client computing device (i.e., each Accused
`Apple Devices ); and
`
`a definition of a first content element (incorporating the present price of a
`stock) for the networked information monitor template, the definition of
`the first content element referencing a first network location (such as
`using uniform resource locators) from which the first content element for
`the networked information monitor template is served over the network;
`
`’545 patent, claim 1.
`
`
`19
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 20 of 53
`
`69.
`
`Further, the Apple-Supported Apps (which are installed based on the
`
`information contained in the data structures in .ipa files (NIM templates)) must meet
`
`Apple’s stated requirement that the Apple-Supported Apps “should include features,
`
`content, and UI that elevate it beyond a repackaged website. If your app is not
`
`particularly useful, unique, or “app-like,” it doesn’t belong on the App Store. If your
`
`App doesn’t provide some sort of lasting entertainment value or adequate utility, it may
`
`not be accepted.” https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#design.
`
`In other words, Apple exercises direct control of the NIM templates through its App
`
`Store requirements.
`
`70. More specifically, the data structures in .ipa files for Apple-Supported
`
`Apps define a viewer graphical user interface (e.g., a user interface presented on the
`
`screen) that may include menus, buttons, and other features. The data structures in .ipa
`
`files for Apple-Supported Apps contain data related to the visual presentation of the
`
`application, as suggested by the excerpts below.
`
`Source: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#design.
`
`
`
`Specifically, this excerpt refers to app bundles; a bundle is a collection of files submitted
`
`20
`
`

`

`Case 6:22-cv-00533-ADA Document 32 Filed 09/12/22 Page 21 of 53
`
`to an app store for evaluation and approval. If approved, the bundle is used to create a
`
`package file (.ipa).
`
`71. Additionally, data structures in .ipa files for Apple-Supported Apps (i.e.,
`
`the NIM template) comprise a definition of a first content element for the networked
`
`info